Re: file system and raid performance

From: Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com>
To: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
Cc: greg(at)tcscs(dot)com, 'Mark Wong' <markwkm(at)gmail(dot)com>, david(at)lang(dot)hm, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, 'Gabrielle Roth' <gorthx(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: file system and raid performance
Date: 2008-08-07 10:21:04
Message-ID: 489ACC90.9030401@sime.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Mark Kirkwood schrieb:
> Mark Kirkwood wrote:
>> You are right, it does (I may be recalling performance from my other
>> machine that has a 3Ware card - this was a couple of years ago...)
>> Anyway, I'm thinking for the Hardware raid tests they may need to be
>> specified.
>>
>>
>
> FWIW - of course this somewhat academic given that the single disk xfs
> test failed! I'm puzzled - having a Gentoo system of similar
> configuration (2.6.25-gentoo-r6) and running the fio tests a little
> modified for my config (2 cpu PIII 2G RAM with 4x ATA disks RAID0 and
> all xfs filesystems - I changed sizes of files to 4G and no. processes
> to 4) all tests that failed on Marks HP work on my Supermicro P2TDER +
> Promise TX4000. In fact the performance is pretty reasonable on the
> old girl as well (seq read is 142Mb/s and the random read/write is
> 12.7/12.0 Mb/s).
>
> I certainly would like to see some more info on why the xfs tests were
> failing - as on most systems I've encountered xfs is a great performer.
>
> regards
>
> Mark
>
I can second this, we use XFS on nearly all our database servers, and
never encountered the problems mentioned.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Huxton 2008-08-07 10:40:24 Re: Plz Heeeelp! performance settings
Previous Message Mark Kirkwood 2008-08-07 09:40:00 Re: file system and raid performance